IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v10y2018i8p2715-d161478.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evaluating the Link between Low Carbon Reductions Strategies and Its Performance in the Context of Climate Change: A Carbon Footprint of a Wood-Frame Residential Building in Quebec, Canada

Author

Listed:
  • Alejandro Padilla-Rivera

    (NSERC Industrial Research Chair on Ecoresponsible Wood Construction, Département des Sciences du Bois et de la Forêt, Université Laval, 2425 Rue de la Terrasse, Pavillon Abitibi-Price, Québec, QC G1V 0A6, Canada)

  • Ben Amor

    (Interdisciplinary Research Laboratory on Sustainable Engineering and Ecodesign (LIRIDE), Civil Engineering Department, Université de Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke, QC J1K 2R1, Canada)

  • Pierre Blanchet

    (NSERC Industrial Research Chair on Ecoresponsible Wood Construction, Département des Sciences du Bois et de la Forêt, Université Laval, 2425 Rue de la Terrasse, Pavillon Abitibi-Price, Québec, QC G1V 0A6, Canada)

Abstract

The design and study of low carbon buildings is a major concern in a modern economy due to high carbon emissions produced by buildings and its effects on climate change. Studies have investigated (CFP) Carbon Footprint of buildings, but there remains a need for a strong analysis that measure and quantify the overall degree of GHG emissions reductions and its relationship with the effect on climate change mitigation. This study evaluates the potential of reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from the building sector by evaluating the (CFP) of four hotpots approaches defined in line with commonly carbon reduction strategies, also known as mitigation strategies. CFP framework is applied to compare the (CC) climate change impact of mitigation strategies. A multi-story timber residential construction in Quebec City (Canada) was chosen as a baseline scenario. This building has been designed with the idea of being a reference of sustainable development application in the building sector. In this scenario, the production of materials and construction (assembly, waste management and transportation) were evaluated. A CFP that covers eight actions divided in four low carbon strategies, including: low carbon materials, material minimization, reuse and recycle materials and adoption of local sources and use of biofuels were evaluated. The results of this study shows that the used of prefabricated technique in buildings is an alternative to reduce the CFP of buildings in the context of Quebec. The CC decreases per m 2 floor area in baseline scenario is up to 25% than current buildings. If the benefits of low carbon strategies are included, the timber structures can generate 38% lower CC than the original baseline scenario. The investigation recommends that CO 2 eq emissions reduction in the design and implementation of residential constructions as climate change mitigation is perfectly feasible by following different working strategies. It is concluded that if the four strategies were implemented in current buildings they would have environmental benefits by reducing its CFP. The reuse wood wastes into production of particleboard has the greatest environmental benefit due to temporary carbon storage.

Suggested Citation

  • Alejandro Padilla-Rivera & Ben Amor & Pierre Blanchet, 2018. "Evaluating the Link between Low Carbon Reductions Strategies and Its Performance in the Context of Climate Change: A Carbon Footprint of a Wood-Frame Residential Building in Quebec, Canada," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-20, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:10:y:2018:i:8:p:2715-:d:161478
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/8/2715/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/8/2715/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Dechezlepretre, Antoine & Glachant, Matthieu & Hascic, Ivan & Johnstone, Nick & Meniere, Yann, 2009. "Invention and Transfer of Climate Change Mitigation Technologies on a Global Scale: A Study Drawing on Patent Data," Sustainable Development Papers 54361, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).
    2. Zhang, Dahai & Wang, Jiaqi & Lin, Yonggang & Si, Yulin & Huang, Can & Yang, Jing & Huang, Bin & Li, Wei, 2017. "Present situation and future prospect of renewable energy in China," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 865-871.
    3. Pietro A. Renzulli & Bruno Notarnicola & Giuseppe Tassielli & Gabriella Arcese & Rosa Di Capua, 2016. "Life Cycle Assessment of Steel Produced in an Italian Integrated Steel Mill," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(8), pages 1-15, July.
    4. Antoine Dechezleprêtre & Matthieu Glachant & Ivan Haščič & Nick Johnstone & Yann Ménière, 2011. "Invention and Transfer of Climate Change--Mitigation Technologies: A Global Analysis," Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 5(1), pages 109-130, Winter.
    5. Schiavoni, S. & D׳Alessandro, F. & Bianchi, F. & Asdrubali, F., 2016. "Insulation materials for the building sector: A review and comparative analysis," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 988-1011.
    6. Yann Ménière & Antoine Dechezleprêtre & Matthieu Glachant & Ivan Hascic & N. Johnstone, 2011. "Invention and transfer of climate change mitigation technologies: a study drawing on patent data," Post-Print hal-00869795, HAL.
    7. Roh, Seungjun & Tae, Sungho & Suk, Sung Joon & Ford, George, 2017. "Evaluating the embodied environmental impacts of major building tasks and materials of apartment buildings in Korea," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 135-144.
    8. Anand, Chirjiv Kaur & Amor, Ben, 2017. "Recent developments, future challenges and new research directions in LCA of buildings: A critical review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 408-416.
    9. Abd Rashid, Ahmad Faiz & Yusoff, Sumiani, 2015. "A review of life cycle assessment method for building industry," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 244-248.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Kai Kanafani & Jonathan Magnes & Søren Munch Lindhard & Maria Balouktsi, 2023. "Carbon Emissions during the Building Construction Phase: A Comprehensive Case Study of Construction Sites in Denmark," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(14), pages 1-23, July.
    2. Puxin Liu, 2023. "An assessment of financial mechanisms for green financial recovery and climate change mitigation: the case of China," Economic Change and Restructuring, Springer, vol. 56(3), pages 1567-1584, June.
    3. Harkaitz García & Mikel Zubizarreta & Jesús Cuadrado & Juan Luis Osa, 2018. "Sustainability Improvement in the Design of Lightweight Roofs: A New Prototype of Hybrid Steel and Wood Purlins," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-17, December.
    4. Valid Hasyimi & Hossny Azizalrahman, 2018. "A Strategy-Based Model for Low Carbon Cities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-13, December.
    5. Hongmei Liu & Rong Guo & Junjie Tian & Honghao Sun & Yi Wang & Haiyan Li & Lu Yao, 2022. "Quantifying the Carbon Reduction Potential of Recycling Construction Waste Based on Life Cycle Assessment: A Case of Jiangsu Province," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(19), pages 1-16, October.
    6. Nam Yi Yun & M. Ali Ülkü, 2023. "Sustainable Supply Chain Risk Management in a Climate-Changed World: Review of Extant Literature, Trend Analysis, and Guiding Framework for Future Research," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(17), pages 1-32, September.
    7. Agnieszka Sadłowska-Sałęga & Krzysztof Wąs, 2021. "Moisture Risk Analysis for Three Construction Variants of a Wooden Inverted Flat Roof," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(23), pages 1-20, November.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Hu, Hui & Qi, Shaozhou & Chen, Yuanzhi, 2023. "Using green technology for a better tomorrow: How enterprises and government utilize the carbon trading system and incentive policies," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 78(C).
    2. Sandrine Mathy & Patrick Criqui & Katharina Knoop & Manfred Fischedick & Sascha Samadi, 2016. "Uncertainty management and the dynamic adjustment of deep decarbonization pathways," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 16(sup1), pages 47-62, June.
    3. Durán-Romero, Gemma & López, Ana M. & Beliaeva, Tatiana & Ferasso, Marcos & Garonne, Christophe & Jones, Paul, 2020. "Bridging the gap between circular economy and climate change mitigation policies through eco-innovations and Quintuple Helix Model," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 160(C).
    4. Hötte, Kerstin & Pichler, Anton & Lafond, François, 2021. "The rise of science in low-carbon energy technologies," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 139(C).
    5. Hayashi, Daisuke & Huenteler, Joern & Lewis, Joanna I., 2018. "Gone with the wind: A learning curve analysis of China's wind power industry," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 38-51.
    6. Jingbo Cui & Zhenxuan Wang & Haishan Yu, 2022. "Can International Climate Cooperation Induce Knowledge Spillover to Developing Countries? Evidence from CDM," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 82(4), pages 923-951, August.
    7. Zhongju Liao & Xiang Zhu, 2022. "A configurational analysis of firms' environmental innovation: Evidence from China's key pollutant‐discharge listed companies," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 30(6), pages 1511-1522, December.
    8. van den Bijgaart, Inge, 2017. "The unilateral implementation of a sustainable growth path with directed technical change," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 305-327.
    9. Benedict Probst & Simon Touboul & Matthieu Glachant & Antoine Dechezleprêtre, 2021. "Global trends in the invention and diffusion of climate change mitigation technologies," Nature Energy, Nature, vol. 6(11), pages 1077-1086, November.
    10. Solmaria Halleck Vega & Antoine Mandel, 2017. "A network-based approach to technology transfers in the context of climate policy," Documents de travail du Centre d'Economie de la Sorbonne 17009, Université Panthéon-Sorbonne (Paris 1), Centre d'Economie de la Sorbonne.
    11. Cui, Jingbo & Liu, Xi & Sun, Yongping & Yu, Haishan, 2020. "Can CDM projects trigger host countries’ innovation in renewable energy? Evidence of firm-level dataset from China," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 139(C).
    12. Zheming Yan & Rui Shi & Zhiming Yang, 2018. "ICT Development and Sustainable Energy Consumption: A Perspective of Energy Productivity," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-15, July.
    13. Massimiliano Mazzanti & Antonio Musolesi, 2020. "Modeling Green Knowledge Production and Environmental Policies with Semiparametric Panel Data Regression models," SEEDS Working Papers 1420, SEEDS, Sustainability Environmental Economics and Dynamics Studies, revised Sep 2020.
    14. Fanny Henriet, Nicolas Maggiar, and Katheline Schubert, 2014. "A Stylized Applied Energy-Economy Model for France," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 4).
    15. Roberta Sestini & Donatella Pugliese, 2021. "To buy or to do it yourself? Pollution policy and environmental goods in developing countries," Economia e Politica Industriale: Journal of Industrial and Business Economics, Springer;Associazione Amici di Economia e Politica Industriale, vol. 48(1), pages 105-135, March.
    16. Avetisyan, Misak, 2018. "Impacts of global carbon pricing on international trade, modal choice and emissions from international transport," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 532-548.
    17. Costantini, Valeria & Crespi, Francesco & Palma, Alessandro, 2017. "Characterizing the policy mix and its impact on eco-innovation: A patent analysis of energy-efficient technologies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(4), pages 799-819.
    18. Gilli, Marianna & Mancinelli, Susanna & Mazzanti, Massimiliano, 2014. "Innovation complementarity and environmental productivity effects: Reality or delusion? Evidence from the EU," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 56-67.
    19. Idrissa G.-O. Sibailly, 2015. "On the pigouvian tax rule in an open economy: the case of abatement technology trade," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 35(4), pages 2733-2741.
    20. Nunes, Inês Carrilho & Catalão-Lopes, Margarida, 2020. "The impact of oil shocks on innovation for alternative sources of energy: Is there an asymmetric response when oil prices go up or down?," Journal of Commodity Markets, Elsevier, vol. 19(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:10:y:2018:i:8:p:2715-:d:161478. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.